Of Champions League Play-offs and Arsenal’s Goal Keeping
ByAs I settle down to write this piece, Lukas Fabianski’s nightmare at Porto, and talk of a play-off for the fourth Champions’ League place dominate the headlines.
The play-offs scheme is, in my view, both intrusive and unjust. A team that has, over the course of 38 games – long enough to equalise luck, form, injury woes (except perhaps if you’re Arsenal?) -, earned the right to fourth spot shouldn’t then be subject to the much greater risk inherent in a four team play off.
That it is in vogue in the Championship, by the way, doesn’t legitimise it. It is a naked attempt by 16 of the teams to dip their hands in the money pot not by dint of better management and effort, but by brazenly violating the principle of merit.
The talk of Champions’ League money enabling the top four to barricade themselves off permanently from the poorer chasing pack is nonsense:
(“Uefa has studied the economics and points out that Champions League money forms only a small part of our top four’s incomes, 8-13% according to 2007-08 figures.”).
Yes, the top four will by definition earn more money, both via TV rights, ticket sales and merchandising; but are those revenues so vast as to enable permanent dominance? Given that we and Man United are paying off substantial debts (accumulated for different reasons of course), and that Liverpool haven’t exactly been setting the transfer markets on fire, I’d regard the possibility as remote. Chelsea of course inhabit their own wonderland.
I’d argue therefore that – at least some of- the top four owe their status to better management both on and off the pitch. It is worthwhile to remember, too, that quite a few teams in the chasing pack have billionaire backers of their own, rendering pleas of poverty moot.
How just would it be, hypothetically, if fourth placed Arsenal, a viable business, are upstaged in the playoff by the seventh placed billionaire’s plaything – subject to no financial restrictions that apply to business – that is Manchester City?
If the Premier League, and the FA, are truly interested in levelling the playing field, may I suggest barring clubs from running persistent and sizeable losses on the back of benefactors’ indulgence?
But I’m not holding my breath. Neither of those worthies are famous for their decency or common sense. The only thing you can count on them to do is seek the path of least resistance to more money.
Martin Samuel, in The Mail, raises a whole host of other questions pertinent to this nonsense: Why not play off for relegation?; why not play offs for the top spot?
To that I might add the idea of play offs only between the sugar daddy beneficiaries in the top four against those not so blessed from the chasing pack. Surely, that’s levelling the playing field?
Coming to the Porto game itself, I hope we make amends in the return leg and progress to the next round.
I do wonder though, whether we can just blame Fabianski for the debacle and move on?
For some time now, and in quite a few high profile games to boot, he has committed hara kiri, repeatedly violating fundamental precepts of goal keeping. One would imagine, given he’s our #2, that the coaches would have taken special pains to drill the fundamentals into him in the aftermath of these accidents.
Is the problem therefore just Fabianski’s inability to deal with the big time? or are there deficiencies in the coaching of our defence generally? Given that we have never enjoyed a comfortable goal keeping situation at the club – barring patches with Lehman – since Seaman’s retirement, I’m unable to entirely persuade myself that this is solely a personnel problem.
Time will tell if, apart from being poorly staffed, we are also inadequately coached in that department.
Tue 13th September 2011; 19:45, Dortmund
Playoffs for the CL spot? Nonsense indeed Saloner. Just like the professor said, playoffs will affect the league adversely in terms of teams slacking off and stuff.
In regards to the coaching, can’t we bring in Seaman to share some of his knowledge? Mind you, Seaman had his moments too, but we haven’t had a solid keeper since him.
On a different topic altogether, a mate (scouser) reckons that if Pompey go into administration, then the table will be re written (i.e. Arsenal, Chelski and manure will loose 6 points they took off Pompey). I told him that this was a load of bollix and utter nonsense….but is it true?
In terms of games already played, what would happen if Pompey go into administration or liquidation?
Although totally unfair on the team that finishes 3rd in the Championship or 4th in Leagues 1 & 2 the play-offs do keep the season open for a lot of clubs that would otherwise have meaningless fixtures for the last 2 months or so.
However the PL is supposed to be something else & distorting the qualification could actually lose the 4th English place, which was earned by the success of our clubs.
Clearly the Tinys & Villas downwards would go for it, although I understand David Moyes doesn’t like it, but maybe they would be put off if a 4th relegation place was introduced to be played-off by places 14-17?
I was reminded yesterday that the club have not produced a permanent ‘keeper since the early 1950s. I cannot recall us coming close. Taylor perhaps being a real prospect. I am not too sure that there have been too many come through starting at the top English clubs in recent years either.
It is not a case of giving up, because you never know if you have a Casillas or a Buffon, who are exceptions to the rule. Maybe Szezny, who looked very good against WBA, making several impressive saves combined with sound handling, & has been getting rave reviews at Brentford, can be of that ilk. However would it not be better to have the mindset that your young ‘keepers are going to have a minimum of 2/3 seasons on loan, in English conditions, before getting near the 1st team.
This means until this is set up you have to buy your ‘keepers, with proven ability rather than potential. Not an easy task because there really are no perfect ones out there.
Fabianski is 24, still not too old for a loan spell to gain confidence (or more lose the nerves), which is all I feel is lacking with him. He actually made 2 excellent saves & handled well but he is costing us goals in every game.
Cf
I believe Seaman has been spending time with the ‘keepers, although it should be remembered that the most gifted players are not always so good at passing it on as a coach.
We would lose the 6 points gained against Pompey. Liverpool would be the beneficiaries, because they lost at Fratton Park. We would have a game in hand on those teams that haven’t played them twice.
I really hope they can keep going, I have always had a soft spot for them.
Darius
I liked your article on ACLF.
A great blog still with YW & your posts but what do you do with some people? Why do they consider themselves supporters, when they clearly hate everything about Arsenal?
Thanks Flint McCullough for confirming that. So, for all the crap they have played, the scousers could still win the league.
Some interesting thoughts on the play offs proposal.
Wenger questions how practical it is to make this a practice yet the very practice of play offs will mean that a team not worthy of a champions league place on merit is kicked out of qualifiers and eventually drops the co-efficient of England as measured by UEFA.
The irony will be that with a lower co-efficient, the English league will lose that 4th spot.
But the over-riding view especially from the top 4 managers is that “we’ll be damned if we fight for 38 games to get there on merit for some hopefuls to steal the chance with a play off”.